[johnmflores]

I really dig this one!

They could be the second with an Android powered camera, and the first with an Android MILC

[Tonto]

But seriously, I just might get rid of all my Pentax gear and start over with something else just for change - if selling stuff wasn't such a major pain in the ass. With all the haggling, packaging, shipping etc. involved, I'd probably rather just dump them.

But the lot on the marketplace as a package, then just one package and will be going to a good home!

[rawr]

I wonder if they could extend the Ricoh GXR concept in some way.

Stage 1 of course would be to simply provide a FF K-mount module for the existing GXR system.

Stage 2 would be to blend the GXR concept with a K-5 or 645D body. Make a body that is just a little larger than a K-5 or even 645D size, put in a big bright optical viewfinder, provide FF and APS-C K-mount expansion units, as well as M mount - or even Canon or Nikon mount expansion units . Provide lots of new FF Pentax lenses and accessories. Profit.

And open source the camera firmware, + provide a full SDK for a nominal price to developers.

[bossa]

I've been banging on about square sensors for weeks now but I never even thought about the actual size it would have to be if the current full frame lenses were to be used. Looking at the necessary reduction required, I now see it would obviously create a totally new format which probably wouldn't challenge FF ( I hate that term.. does it mean that MF is fuller than 'full'?) in the end.. but maybe.

How about a Borg style remote VF that you wear on your head (or a heads-up display gadget)? The sensor could even be built in and you could attach a lens to your shoulder like a Predator. (lol.. kidding but possible).

No harm in being ridiculous once in awhile eh?

[Transit]

..... Pentax do want to make a FF dSLR but if they do it would have to be unique in some way, ......

twin snorkels maybe?

[Transit]

.....
How about a Borg style remote VF that you wear on your head (or a heads-up display gadget)? The sensor could even be built in and you could attach a lens to your shoulder like a Predator. (lol.. kidding but possible).
....

Implant it ! You would want quality control to be good though

[PPPPPP42]

Actually the one thing I truly want them to implement is an easily removable sensor, if you take the bottom plate off my K20D for example you can see the outer housing for the sensor block, they need to make it so it pushes into a slot with pin connectors with the bottom off, and then just has screws in place from the bottom to hold it. That way any of the many sensor failures would just be a new sensor and 10 minutes of easy work to replace, plus then they could release alternative sensors like Infrared or stuff like that and they could be easily changed out. Or even upgrade the sensors (with new firmware also) without replacing the whole camera.
This would be most critical for a super expensive FF camera in today's world of flaky cheap sensors.

Right now the clowns that designed the camera put the sensor on a table and started piling camera parts around it, its nearly the last part out and involves soldering as I recall when you have to replace it making the camera a throw away most of the time.

[Alizarine]

An improved digital version of the LX would be just fine for me. Could use the old design looks, but that's quite FujOlympus. But I would agree to not do another Marc Newson one though.

Wish I had time to photoshop one concept...

[bkpix]

I would really like to see a FF digital body from Pentax that has its roots in the old LX film body: small, tight, tough and functional.

A feature I would especially like to see -- and don't really see from Nikon, either, though I keep hearing the D700 is good in this regard -- is a digital body that is designed to play well with old manual focus lenses. The main thing that is lacking is some way to manually focus that's as good as it was on film bodies with split-image viewfinders and microprisms. Accurate focus confirmation -- with some indication which way to turn the lens to get there -- would be fine.

Because of the larger sensor, older lenses won't be pushed as hard, in terms of image quality, as they are on cropped sensors, and I would be perfectly happy to use them.

EVF would be fine. This is the 21st century, after all

Changeable viewfinders would be a great LX-like idea.

What about an LX-D that could actually use the old LX viewfinders?

[bkpix]

I already have the lenses for it... same ones I use on my LX.

[Venturi]

Why does a Pentax 35mm dSLR have to be "unique"? Why can't Pentax simply do what it does best: pack professional grade features into a rugged, weather-proof, highly ergonomic body at roughly one-third the cost of Canikon's offerings. That was unique enough to turn heads from 2006 to 2010.

If Pentax went back to basics, concentrated on building solid cameras with great features, and releasing incremental performance and feature improvements on a steady, predictable schedule, they just might actually start to see growth in market share.

I'd love to see a full-frame Pentax DSLR. It would be nice getting relatively the same image characteristics via digital as I get with film, and bigger pixels would be nice, too. But what I really want from Pentax is to pick a unified direction and see it through. I'm weary of "being different".

In my opinion, Pentax has "innovated" itself into a corner with the Q and the K-01. The Q burned up precious R&D resources that might have been better used to beef up the lens line-up with full-frame compatible optics and start designing K-5's big brother. The K-01, again in my opinion, is a step backward. They ripped out the mirror, prism and view finder, dumbed down the sensor and called it "new". No gentlemen, it's lazy, short-sighted, unweildy, and ugly. It is not an entry point into Pentax dSLRs; it's an overpriced novelty. The only real customer base for this is existing Pentax shooters to toss in their bag, already filled with lenses.

Meanwhile, Pentax has pulled its only entry-level offering from production with no successor in sight, and there is no indication that anything is in the works past the K-5.

You see, I want to buy a new Pentax dSLR body, but I'm not going to dump another $2000, or more, into Pentax dSLRs if I can't be reasonably assured they are going to continue to make dSLRs. I was ready to buy right before the Ricoh buy-out; I held off to see what Ricoh was going to do. When the K-01 was announced I took the K-5/grip/batteries/etc money and put it into a couple used lenses for my 645, and a new scanner.

The market will never take Pentax serious if Pentax continues to flip and flop at every turn. The Q and the K-01 may be cute, but they're not going to build the brand. It's time to either get in the game or get out, Pentax. I really hope they lace up.

/end_rant

[Quazimoto]

I agree with the above comment, especially the bit about why do Pentax need to be unique - it's silly, they act as if everyone who is ever going to buy a FF has already bought one, so they need to give people a reason to switch... What a load of rubbish. They just need to make the camera, and release it. Over time, as people upgrade from aps-c to FF, people will start buying Pentax ones. Are they going to overthrow Nikon and Canon? No. Do they NEED to? Again, no. Microsoft never overthrew Apple, yet they go ok! Their logic seems to be "we can't lose if we don't play", but well... if you don't play you lose, it's called a forfeit.
I started this thread because Pentax have said they won't do it unless they bring something new, so I'm trying to help. Thanks for the ideas everyone - and to everyone discussing the noise versus pixels thingy - I know all things are not equal and all that stuff (look at a K5 versus a K10D, more pixels, less noise) but do you seriously think you can just multiply the amount of pixels on a sensor the same size, by THREE and not get a trade off in something? I don't. I also don't think anyone can tell the difference between a 12MP image and a 36MP image at basically any size, so it IS a pointless exercise that is going to increase file sizes and write times, if nothing else - but I'll bet my 50-135mm that there WILL be an increase in something else, and that something will be NOISE. There'll also be an increase in Nikon snobs who think they are better than everyone else because their camera has more large numbers associated with it.

[Coeurdechene]

Why can't Pentax simply do what it does best: pack professional grade features into a rugged, weather-proof, highly ergonomic body at roughly one-third the cost of Canikon's offerings

They can't because of market share and cost...they can't because market share and Nikon/Canon dominance over the market that consumes those cameras. I doubt pentax can release a pro grade FF at an affordable price (and that's the only scenario where the potential gains might outweight the cost). Pentax is far from the features included in a pro grade body (state of the art AF, good flash system...) and unless they break in an outstanding way the price barrier the only ones who will consider buying one are the pentax enthusiasts, wich is a dim market.
So pentax's business decision to appear as something entirely different makes perfect sense...they are a niche brand that is trying to avoid a harsh direct competition with Canikon offering things those brands do not offer (efficient, rugged, reasonably priced, small Apsc DSLRs, and premium glass optimized for those apsc at a lower price than the top end canikon glass...or the Q or a mirrorless with a bigger sensor than those of the competition).

[redrockcoulee]

Hasselblad's CFV16 back was 36 by 36 mm and that is medium format. I would buy a Pentax that shot a square format at the largest square image size feasible for the FA lenses however I would never expect Pentax or anyone else to do so. Simply that I would like it does not mean I either need it or think enough others would want it either.

The Nikon D3 images do not compare to medium format film when large prints are made. My wife tested it and even much smaller than the 60 by 80 inch prints she was making the difference between MF scanned and the D3 images was apparent. That was using the 14-24 lens which is a great lens. My point is that Pentax if making a FF camera could not satisfied with that sensor now that more capable ones are on the market. I am not in the market for a FF myself regardless of who makes it. But i do agree with some of the comments above, if Pentax makes one it will have to be consumer or prosumer at best as there is no way they can compete with the pro systems at this time; flash, AF, lenses and support in the rental market are all weak spots for that to happen.

[Clavius]

That's what I've been saying. An affordable prosumer / consumor FF camera would in itself already be very unique. There is almost no competition in that area; it's a free niche for Pentax to settle itself in. Once there, it can always expand later on.